Message-ID: <66794d8c1d425_3637da294d8@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2024 06:42:20 -0400
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To: Chengen Du <chengen.du@...onical.com>, 
 Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
Cc: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, 
 davem@...emloft.net, 
 edumazet@...gle.com, 
 kuba@...nel.org, 
 pabeni@...hat.com, 
 kaber@...sh.net, 
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, 
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
 stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8] af_packet: Handle outgoing VLAN packets without
 hardware offloading

Chengen Du wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 3:36 PM Willem de Bruijn
> <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > Chengen Du wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 5:24 PM Willem de Bruijn
> > > <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Jiri Pirko wrote:
> > > > > Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 09:07:58PM CEST, willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com wrote:
> > > > > >Jiri Pirko wrote:
> > > > > >> Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 07:45:14AM CEST, chengen.du@...onical.com wrote:
> > > > > >> >The issue initially stems from libpcap. The ethertype will be overwritten
> > > > > >> >as the VLAN TPID if the network interface lacks hardware VLAN offloading.
> > > > > >> >In the outbound packet path, if hardware VLAN offloading is unavailable,
> > > > > >> >the VLAN tag is inserted into the payload but then cleared from the sk_buff
> > > > > >> >struct. Consequently, this can lead to a false negative when checking for
> > > > > >> >the presence of a VLAN tag, causing the packet sniffing outcome to lack
> > > > > >> >VLAN tag information (i.e., TCI-TPID). As a result, the packet capturing
> > > > > >> >tool may be unable to parse packets as expected.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >The TCI-TPID is missing because the prb_fill_vlan_info() function does not
> > > > > >> >modify the tp_vlan_tci/tp_vlan_tpid values, as the information is in the
> > > > > >> >payload and not in the sk_buff struct. The skb_vlan_tag_present() function
> > > > > >> >only checks vlan_all in the sk_buff struct. In cooked mode, the L2 header
> > > > > >> >is stripped, preventing the packet capturing tool from determining the
> > > > > >> >correct TCI-TPID value. Additionally, the protocol in SLL is incorrect,
> > > > > >> >which means the packet capturing tool cannot parse the L3 header correctly.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >Link: https://github.com/the-tcpdump-group/libpcap/issues/1105
> > > > > >> >Link: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20240520070348.26725-1-chengen.du@canonical.com/T/#u
> > > > > >> >Fixes: 393e52e33c6c ("packet: deliver VLAN TCI to userspace")
> > > > > >> >Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> > > > > >> >Signed-off-by: Chengen Du <chengen.du@...onical.com>
> > > > > >> >---
> > > > > >> > net/packet/af_packet.c | 86 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > > > > >> > 1 file changed, 84 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >diff --git a/net/packet/af_packet.c b/net/packet/af_packet.c
> > > > > >> >index ea3ebc160e25..84e8884a77e3 100644
> > > > > >> >--- a/net/packet/af_packet.c
> > > > > >> >+++ b/net/packet/af_packet.c
> > > > > >> >@@ -538,6 +538,61 @@ static void *packet_current_frame(struct packet_sock *po,
> > > > > >> >  return packet_lookup_frame(po, rb, rb->head, status);
> > > > > >> > }
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >+static u16 vlan_get_tci(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev)
> > > > > >> >+{
> > > > > >> >+ struct vlan_hdr vhdr, *vh;
> > > > > >> >+ u8 *skb_orig_data = skb->data;
> > > > > >> >+ int skb_orig_len = skb->len;
> > > > > >> >+ unsigned int header_len;
> > > > > >> >+
> > > > > >> >+ if (!dev)
> > > > > >> >+         return 0;
> > > > > >> >+
> > > > > >> >+ /* In the SOCK_DGRAM scenario, skb data starts at the network
> > > > > >> >+  * protocol, which is after the VLAN headers. The outer VLAN
> > > > > >> >+  * header is at the hard_header_len offset in non-variable
> > > > > >> >+  * length link layer headers. If it's a VLAN device, the
> > > > > >> >+  * min_header_len should be used to exclude the VLAN header
> > > > > >> >+  * size.
> > > > > >> >+  */
> > > > > >> >+ if (dev->min_header_len == dev->hard_header_len)
> > > > > >> >+         header_len = dev->hard_header_len;
> > > > > >> >+ else if (is_vlan_dev(dev))
> > > > > >> >+         header_len = dev->min_header_len;
> > > > > >> >+ else
> > > > > >> >+         return 0;
> > > > > >> >+
> > > > > >> >+ skb_push(skb, skb->data - skb_mac_header(skb));
> > > > > >> >+ vh = skb_header_pointer(skb, header_len, sizeof(vhdr), &vhdr);
> > > > > >> >+ if (skb_orig_data != skb->data) {
> > > > > >> >+         skb->data = skb_orig_data;
> > > > > >> >+         skb->len = skb_orig_len;
> > > > > >> >+ }
> > > > > >> >+ if (unlikely(!vh))
> > > > > >> >+         return 0;
> > > > > >> >+
> > > > > >> >+ return ntohs(vh->h_vlan_TCI);
> > > > > >> >+}
> > > > > >> >+
> > > > > >> >+static __be16 vlan_get_protocol_dgram(struct sk_buff *skb)
> > > > > >> >+{
> > > > > >> >+ __be16 proto = skb->protocol;
> > > > > >> >+
> > > > > >> >+ if (unlikely(eth_type_vlan(proto))) {
> > > > > >> >+         u8 *skb_orig_data = skb->data;
> > > > > >> >+         int skb_orig_len = skb->len;
> > > > > >> >+
> > > > > >> >+         skb_push(skb, skb->data - skb_mac_header(skb));
> > > > > >> >+         proto = __vlan_get_protocol(skb, proto, NULL);
> > > > > >> >+         if (skb_orig_data != skb->data) {
> > > > > >> >+                 skb->data = skb_orig_data;
> > > > > >> >+                 skb->len = skb_orig_len;
> > > > > >> >+         }
> > > > > >> >+ }
> > > > > >> >+
> > > > > >> >+ return proto;
> > > > > >> >+}
> > > > > >> >+
> > > > > >> > static void prb_del_retire_blk_timer(struct tpacket_kbdq_core *pkc)
> > > > > >> > {
> > > > > >> >  del_timer_sync(&pkc->retire_blk_timer);
> > > > > >> >@@ -1007,10 +1062,16 @@ static void prb_clear_rxhash(struct tpacket_kbdq_core *pkc,
> > > > > >> > static void prb_fill_vlan_info(struct tpacket_kbdq_core *pkc,
> > > > > >> >                  struct tpacket3_hdr *ppd)
> > > > > >> > {
> > > > > >> >+ struct packet_sock *po = container_of(pkc, struct packet_sock, rx_ring.prb_bdqc);
> > > > > >> >+
> > > > > >> >  if (skb_vlan_tag_present(pkc->skb)) {
> > > > > >> >          ppd->hv1.tp_vlan_tci = skb_vlan_tag_get(pkc->skb);
> > > > > >> >          ppd->hv1.tp_vlan_tpid = ntohs(pkc->skb->vlan_proto);
> > > > > >> >          ppd->tp_status = TP_STATUS_VLAN_VALID | TP_STATUS_VLAN_TPID_VALID;
> > > > > >> >+ } else if (unlikely(po->sk.sk_type == SOCK_DGRAM && eth_type_vlan(pkc->skb->protocol))) {
> > > > > >> >+         ppd->hv1.tp_vlan_tci = vlan_get_tci(pkc->skb, pkc->skb->dev);
> > > > > >> >+         ppd->hv1.tp_vlan_tpid = ntohs(pkc->skb->protocol);
> > > > > >> >+         ppd->tp_status = TP_STATUS_VLAN_VALID | TP_STATUS_VLAN_TPID_VALID;
> > > > > >> >  } else {
> > > > > >> >          ppd->hv1.tp_vlan_tci = 0;
> > > > > >> >          ppd->hv1.tp_vlan_tpid = 0;
> > > > > >> >@@ -2428,6 +2489,10 @@ static int tpacket_rcv(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev,
> > > > > >> >                  h.h2->tp_vlan_tci = skb_vlan_tag_get(skb);
> > > > > >> >                  h.h2->tp_vlan_tpid = ntohs(skb->vlan_proto);
> > > > > >> >                  status |= TP_STATUS_VLAN_VALID | TP_STATUS_VLAN_TPID_VALID;
> > > > > >> >+         } else if (unlikely(sk->sk_type == SOCK_DGRAM && eth_type_vlan(skb->protocol))) {
> > > > > >> >+                 h.h2->tp_vlan_tci = vlan_get_tci(skb, skb->dev);
> > > > > >> >+                 h.h2->tp_vlan_tpid = ntohs(skb->protocol);
> > > > > >> >+                 status |= TP_STATUS_VLAN_VALID | TP_STATUS_VLAN_TPID_VALID;
> > > > > >> >          } else {
> > > > > >> >                  h.h2->tp_vlan_tci = 0;
> > > > > >> >                  h.h2->tp_vlan_tpid = 0;
> > > > > >> >@@ -2457,7 +2522,8 @@ static int tpacket_rcv(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev,
> > > > > >> >  sll->sll_halen = dev_parse_header(skb, sll->sll_addr);
> > > > > >> >  sll->sll_family = AF_PACKET;
> > > > > >> >  sll->sll_hatype = dev->type;
> > > > > >> >- sll->sll_protocol = skb->protocol;
> > > > > >> >+ sll->sll_protocol = (sk->sk_type == SOCK_DGRAM) ?
> > > > > >> >+         vlan_get_protocol_dgram(skb) : skb->protocol;
> > > > > >> >  sll->sll_pkttype = skb->pkt_type;
> > > > > >> >  if (unlikely(packet_sock_flag(po, PACKET_SOCK_ORIGDEV)))
> > > > > >> >          sll->sll_ifindex = orig_dev->ifindex;
> > > > > >> >@@ -3482,7 +3548,8 @@ static int packet_recvmsg(struct socket *sock, struct msghdr *msg, size_t len,
> > > > > >> >          /* Original length was stored in sockaddr_ll fields */
> > > > > >> >          origlen = PACKET_SKB_CB(skb)->sa.origlen;
> > > > > >> >          sll->sll_family = AF_PACKET;
> > > > > >> >-         sll->sll_protocol = skb->protocol;
> > > > > >> >+         sll->sll_protocol = (sock->type == SOCK_DGRAM) ?
> > > > > >> >+                 vlan_get_protocol_dgram(skb) : skb->protocol;
> > > > > >> >  }
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >  sock_recv_cmsgs(msg, sk, skb);
> > > > > >> >@@ -3539,6 +3606,21 @@ static int packet_recvmsg(struct socket *sock, struct msghdr *msg, size_t len,
> > > > > >> >                  aux.tp_vlan_tci = skb_vlan_tag_get(skb);
> > > > > >> >                  aux.tp_vlan_tpid = ntohs(skb->vlan_proto);
> > > > > >> >                  aux.tp_status |= TP_STATUS_VLAN_VALID | TP_STATUS_VLAN_TPID_VALID;
> > > > > >> >+         } else if (unlikely(sock->type == SOCK_DGRAM && eth_type_vlan(skb->protocol))) {
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I don't understand why this would be needed here. We spent quite a bit
> > > > > >> of efford in the past to make sure vlan header is always stripped.
> > > > > >> Could you fix that in tx path to fulfill the expectation?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Doesn't that require NETIF_F_HW_VLAN_CTAG_TX?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >I also wondered whether we should just convert the skb for this case
> > > > > >with skb_vlan_untag, to avoid needing new PF_PACKET logic to handle
> > > > > >unstripped tags in the packet socket code. But it seems equally
> > > > > >complex.
> > > > >
> > > > > Correct. skb_vlan_untag() as a preparation of skb before this function
> > > > > is called is exactly what I was suggesting.
> > > >
> > > > It's not necessarily simpler, as that function expects skb->data to
> > > > point to the (outer) VLAN header.
> > > >
> > > > It will pull that one, but not any subsequent ones.
> > > >
> > > > SOCK_DGRAM expects skb->data to point to the network layer header.
> > > > And we only want to make this change for SOCK_DGRAM and if auxdata is
> > > > requested.
> > > >
> > > > Not sure that it will be simpler. But worth a look at least.
> > >
> > > Thank you for your suggestion.
> > >
> > > I have analyzed the code and considered a feasible approach. We could
> > > call skb_vlan_untag() in packet_rcv before pushing skb into
> > > sk->sk_receive_queue.
> >
> > Only for SOCK_DGRAM.
> >
> > And there is some user risk, as they will see different packets on
> > the same devices as before. A robust program should work for both
> > vlan stripped and unstripped, and the unstripped case is already
> > broken wrt sll_protocol returned, so I suppose this is acceptable.
> >
> > > We would also need to determine if auxdata is
> > > required to maintain performance, which might cause the logic of
> > > judging PACKET_SOCK_AUXDATA to be spread across both the packet_rcv()
> > > and packet_recvmsg() functions.
> >
> > You mean to only make the above change if SOCK_DGRAM and auxdata is
> > requested?
> 
> Yes, we can constrain the performance overhead to specific scenarios this way.
> 
> >
> > Btw, also tpacket_rcv, where auxdata is always returned.
> >
> > > The skb_vlan_untag() function handles VLANs in a more comprehensive
> > > way, but it seems to have a greater performance impact compared to our
> > > current approach.
> >
> > I was afraid of that too. The skb_share_check is fine, as this also
> > exists in packet_rcv, before we would call skb_vlan_untag.
> >
> > A bigger issue: this only pulls the outer tag. So we still need to
> > handle the vlan stacking case correctly manually.
> 
> It seems we are on the same page. The need to manually handle VLAN
> stacking is a significant concern. Since the code is in the critical
> path, we must carefully manage the performance overhead. Given that
> the current method is more efficient than calling skb_vlan_untag(), I
> propose retaining the patch as is. Please let me know if there are any
> other concerns.

I agree.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists